Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the fscrypt tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 11:03:00 +1000

Hi all,

On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 13:02:54 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/buffer.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   4f74d15fe408 ("ext4: add inline encryption support")
> 
> from the fscrypt tree and commit:
> 
>   ed9b3196d2b2 ("fs: remove a weird comment in submit_bh_wbc")
> 
> from the block tree.
> 
> 
> diff --cc fs/buffer.c
> index dc5e05b47646,2725ebbcfdc2..000000000000
> --- a/fs/buffer.c
> +++ b/fs/buffer.c
> @@@ -3039,14 -3040,7 +3039,10 @@@ static int submit_bh_wbc(int op, int op
>   	if (test_set_buffer_req(bh) && (op == REQ_OP_WRITE))
>   		clear_buffer_write_io_error(bh);
>   
> - 	/*
> - 	 * from here on down, it's all bio -- do the initial mapping,
> - 	 * submit_bio -> generic_make_request may further map this bio around
> - 	 */
>   	bio = bio_alloc(GFP_NOIO, 1);
>  +
>  +	fscrypt_set_bio_crypt_ctx_bh(bio, bh, GFP_NOIO);
>  +
>   	bio->bi_iter.bi_sector = bh->b_blocknr * (bh->b_size >> 9);
>   	bio_set_dev(bio, bh->b_bdev);
>   	bio->bi_write_hint = write_hint;

This is now also a conflict between the zonefs tree and the fscrypt
tree (since the zonefs tree has merged part of the block tree).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell